Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40053737›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Publishing Identifiable Patient Photographs in the Digital Age: Focus Group Study of Patients, Doctors, and Medical Students.

Marija Roguljić, Dina Šimunović, Ivan Buljan, Marija Franka Žuljević, Antonela Turić, Ana Marušić

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Marija RoguljićDepartment of Periodontology, University of Split, Split, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0003-3752-9074
Dina ŠimunovićPrivate Dental Practice, Split, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0002-1994-9369
Ivan BuljanDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Split, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0002-8719-7277
Marija Franka ŽuljevićDepartment of Medical Humanities, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0001-9805-7491
Antonela TurićDental Outpatient Clinic Split, Vis, Croatia.ORCID 0009-0002-5535-6242
Ana MarušićDepartment of Research in Biomedicine and Health, Center for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia.ORCID 0000-0001-6272-0917

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe publication of patient photographs in scientific journals continues to pose challenges regarding privacy and confidentiality, despite existing ethical guidelines. Recent studies indicate that key stakeholders-including health care professionals and patients-lack sufficient awareness of the ethical considerations surrounding patient photographs, particularly in the context of digital scientific publishing.

objectiveThis qualitative study aims to explore how different stakeholders-patients, medical students, and doctors-understand the challenges of patient privacy and confidentiality in scientific publications. Additionally, it sought to identify key areas for future research, particularly in the context of online, open-access articles.

methodsWe conducted 4 online focus groups due to COVID-19 restrictions: 1 with patients, 2 with final-year medical students, and 1 with head and neck physicians and dentists who regularly handle patient photographs. Participants were invited via email, and those who accepted took part in discussions lasting approximately 1 hour. All interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis. All 4 focus groups were asked the same set of questions, covering the following topics: (1) consent for publishing patient photographs, (2) information on guidelines and standards for consent to publish patient photographs, (3) the importance of informed consent for various purposes, (4) methods for deidentifying patient photographs, and (5) the use of patient photographs in online, open-access publishing.

resultsThree key themes emerged from the focus group discussions: (1) no definitive resources or practical recommendations available, (2) online publishing of patient images makes them more open to misuse, and (3) anonymization techniques have limitations. All stakeholder groups expressed a lack of knowledge about online publishing in general and concerns about the fate of patient photographs in the digital environment after publication. They emphasized the need for increased awareness among all relevant stakeholders and more stringent procedures for obtaining informed patient consent before publishing photographs. While they recognized the usefulness of image anonymization techniques in protecting patient identity, they were also aware that current methods remain insufficient to ensure complete anonymity.

conclusionsThis qualitative study highlights that publishing patient photographs in open-access scientific journals is an important, serious, and largely unexplored issue, with all stakeholders still uncertain about the best ways to protect patient privacy. Clinicians, publishers, and journal editors should not only implement best practices to ensure fully informed patient consent for publishing identifiable photographs but also develop technical and governance safeguards. Future quantitative studies are needed to identify the most effective ways to enhance stakeholders' knowledge, policies, and procedures, ultimately guiding the development of practical recommendations for the ethical publication of patient photographs in scientific journals.

Indexed as

ConfidentialityPatientsPhotographyPhysiciansPublishingStudents, MedicalAdultCOVID-19FemaleFocus GroupsHumansInformed ConsentMalePrivacyQualitative Researchdata protectionethical publishingfocus group.informed consentopen accesspatient photographspatient privacy, confidentialityscientific journals

Identifiers

PMID40053737
PMCPMC11923485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.